Phoenix CityScape Thread - Page 352

HX_Guy · #**7021** Posted **Feb 24, 2012, 4:58 PM**

Damn that's awesome! Either tower would be great and it's awesome hearing that other towers are being planned for downtown.

gymratmanaz · #**7022** Posted **Feb 24, 2012, 5:37 PM**

I smell a beer coming my way from someone if this continues to come true.

HX_Guy · #**7023** Posted **Mar 5, 2012, 8:28 PM**

Lades and gentleman!!! Do you see what we have here!

Quote:

Permit# PHAS-0705627-16 Issue Date Expires 3/1/13
Permit Description APARTMENT STRUCTURE
Project 06-5309 CITYSCAPE

And on a funny note...check out how this permit was entered in the system. Type or on purpose?

Tempe_Duck · #**7024** Posted **Mar 5, 2012, 8:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HX_Guy

Lades and gentleman!!! Do you see what we have here!

And on a funny note...check out how this permit was entered in the system.

I don't get it? What is funny about the permit?

PhxER · #**7025** Posted **Mar 5, 2012, 8:59 PM**

Its Arrogant Butcher not Bastard

JimInCal · #**7026** Posted **Mar 5, 2012, 9:21 PM**

Funny typo. I wonder if whoever entered that is a fan of Stone Brewing Company in San Diego County. They make Arrogant Bastard Ale. If any of you are ever in North SD County (Escondido) Stone has a really nice set-up ... gardens, restaurant, store, tours of the brewery, oh yah and beer (actually from all over the world, not just theirs). You can make a nice afternoon of it there. I personnally like their "Sublimely Self-Righteous Ale".

Vicelord John · #**7027** Posted **Mar 5, 2012, 9:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempe_Duck

I don't get it? What is funny about the permit?

Arrogant Bastard is a beer. I make this same mistake, and have said that to many people. It's obvious the person who typed that is a beer drinker.

gymratmanaz · #**7028** Posted **Mar 5, 2012, 9:32 PM**

HX...are there any specs on the permit....height?

combusean · #**7029** Posted **Mar 5, 2012, 10:05 PM**

^ There's nothing on the permit. It's actually oddly blank in Phoenix's DSD system.

Tempe_Duck · #**7030** Posted **Mar 5, 2012, 11:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicelord John

Arrogant Bastard is a beer. I make this same mistake, and have said that to many people. It's obvious the person who typed that is a beer drinker.

haha, I even know that beer and I didn't catch it.

nickw252 · #**7031** Posted **Mar 24, 2012, 10:37 PM**

Cornhole:

University of Louisville Band and Alumni:

PHX31 · #**7032** Posted **Mar 25, 2012, 6:12 AM**

Beer pong? Ie cornhole

nickw252 · #**7033** Posted **Mar 25, 2012, 1:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PHX31

Beer pong? Ie cornhole

Wow I'm getting old. I can't even get my drinking game names right

Vicelord John · #**7034** Posted **Mar 25, 2012, 3:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PHX31

Beer pong? Ie cornhole

Two totally different games

plinko · #**7035** Posted **Mar 26, 2012, 2:53 AM**

Just another example of why Cityscape is such an unimaginative development, here's a similarly scaled project (though it is a full shopping mall) that just opened in Salt Lake City:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=198420

Not even talking about the architecture of the buildings, look how the overall development addresses multiple blocks and both the street frontage and internal courtyards. Transit integrated, second floor retail that actually works, and circulation and massing that looks like it fits into the cityscape, rather than being a singular development within it.

If you took Collier, the three Cityscape blocks, and Luhrs block and the one to the immediate east and built a development like this, what a wonderful integrated patch you've made into the quilt of downtown. Augment that by the proximity of the arena entry and the convention center?

But alas...Phoenix gives up it's 0,0 point for a bland office tower, a stumpy hotel, and a couple of poorly designed low buildings with a 'park' space between and really poor circulation. Awesome.

BTW, I realize that a huge portion of the money for City Creek in SLC comes from Zions Bank (basically an arm of the LDS Church) so they don't have exactly the same economic constraints of spec developers, but still...

...it would have been nice to see a little more vision and creativity...

phxSUNSfan · #**7036** Posted **Mar 26, 2012, 4:16 AM**

AHHHHH! I mean the color variations are MUCH nicer than CityScape, but the scale of the SLC project is many times larger as well. In order to build something like that in downtown Phoenix, despite all the vacant lots, there would still need to be demolition and merging of lots; wiping out the small blocks of downtown.

It's really just a suburban development in downtown. Too many new downtown developments suffer from this (Seattle's Westlake and Pacific Place for example). It reminds me of the Scottsdale Quarter, Chandler Fashion Center, Desert Ridge, Kierland Commons, etc etc...

Luckily, or maybe not since so many new downtown developments look like this, downtown Phoenix doesn't have the footprint for such a massive, inorganic strip of sterile suburban shopping. CityScape offers enough sterility for downtown, we don't need it expanded. If those blocks along Washington and Jefferson ever do develop into a massive shopping destination at least the developments won't blend together in such a fake, non-urban manner. With the Luhrs buildings, CityScape, Barrister, Collier, etc. all looking very different, a more organic feel will emerge. And stores will be forced to face the streets/sidewalks.

This is a huge plus for SLC in that the development is located downtown, and next to transit, instead of in the suburbs. If only that amount of shopping was in downtown here it would be impressive.

plinko · #**7037** Posted **Mar 26, 2012, 4:33 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by phxSUNSfan

AHHHHH! I mean the color variations are MUCH nicer than CityScape, but the scale of the SLC project is many times larger as well. In order to build something like that in downtown Phoenix, despite all the vacant lots, there would still need to be demolition and merging of lots; wiping out the small blocks of downtown.

I wasn't talking about the overall scope or tenants of the project, but the importance of its connections of disparate parts.

But since you brought it up, 1st Street to 3rd Street, Washington to Madison is the EXACT same footprint as City Creek - 1600ft x 800ft (if you integrated the main entry of the arena into the design).

That type of public-private enterprise might have created something of alot more substance (and wouldn't have required bulldozing anything worth saving).

phxSUNSfan · #**7038** Posted **Mar 26, 2012, 4:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by plinko

But since you brought it up, 1st Street to 3rd Street, Washington to Madison is the EXACT same footprint as City Creek - 1600ft x 800ft (if you integrated the main entry of the arena into the design).

That type of public-private enterprise might have created something of alot more substance (and wouldn't have required bulldozing anything worth saving).

Exactly, if something like this were built downtown it would NOT be inward-facing and all the shops would have to face the street. That OR many historic structures would have to be bulldozed (Luhrs Center and Tower, Barrister, etc). Instead here we have many private owners developing unique properties that can complement each other but never look monotonous like City Creek...

That is also a deterrent to quick development. Luhrs City Center is owned by one company, CityScape by another, Collier yet another, the land next to the arena another still, etc...in SLC it helped that their downtown already had two indoor shopping centers that were integrated into the new development. There just isn't a shopping mall infrastructure like that in downtown Phoenix. That isn't a bad thing in my opinion.

phxSUNSfan · #**7039** Posted **Mar 26, 2012, 5:35 AM**

Something like City Creek might work in Midtown...Park Central Mall.

Transit (light rail), housing (affluent neighborhood/condos) nearby, huge employment zone with high-paying jobs, high traffic area with commuters from North Central would make it a more feasible redevelopment zone for a shopping center like SLC's. Even room for more towers.

plinko · #**7040** Posted **Mar 26, 2012, 3:49 PM**

You've missed the point. I'm not talking about creating a mall. I'm saying the City could have been alot more creative about their incentives and tax giveaways and given it a wider scope that would incorporate multiple developers/owners over a slightly larger area. It's still organic in development, but would begin to link things together rather than trumps up a rather isolated singular development. So instead of Cityscape trying to do EVERYTHING (office, retail, residential, grocery, public space), some of those functions could be a little more spread out and each developer would have a chance to focus a little more on quality vs. quantity.

And none of what I think they could have done involves tearing down Luhrs, Barrister, etc. Of course it would be street oriented rather than internalized.

But yes, I agree that Park Central would be a perfect candidate for a City Creek MALL type development.